The real Glaswegian working class voice in the independence debate read by thousands, the BBC and other related media, secured the first criminal conviction against one of the seven top cybernats outed by the Daily Mail

It was the night that Ruth Davidson showed
how incompetent Scotland’s unpopular Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon
actually is, the EU debacles still haunts the SNP.

During the programme, I put my hand up to
speak, when Isobel Fraser called on me to do so, I made a statement that the
Scottish National Party needed to adopt NATO and be pro Faslane.

The next day on NewsNet Scotland, I was
subjected to abuse online, so I went on to put my abusers straight.

All the abusive comments were taken down.

To recap; George Laird pro NATO and pro
Faslane, later on the SNP or to be more precise Alex Salmond went with NATO
trailing after me as usual. But the other issue of Faslane was bungled by
Salmond in an attempt to shore up his crumbling support. The halfway house approach
simply didn’t stack, Nuclear is here to stay!

A Nuclear Faslane submarine base guarantees
that Scotland would always be safe if independent.

Now Icelandic academics have written that an
independent Scotland would be "at a deep strategic disadvantage" to
Russia.

George Laird right again, and ahead of the
SNP.

Scotland needs ‘allies’; and ‘allies’ means
being part of the NATO club and signing up to all the protocols.

The paper is yet another nail in the
political coffin of Alex Salmond, it shows how unprepared he is to lead Scotland
if independent.

I said it all before and now legal and
political experts from the universities of Iceland and Akureyri have come out
and said the same thing.

Small countries like the Nordic states have
always had to live with similar risks for decades, however, politically in Russia;
armed invasion of a Western State is mostly unthinkable; there are new weapons
on the world stage.

Finance, trade, currency and cyber warfare!

Deluded First Minister Alex Salmond last
week set out his vision for defence in an independent Scotland during a visit
to Shetland, in a conflict, Shetland would be abandoned for strategic purposes.

Russian submarines and naval surface fleet
would have control of the sea and air due to their superior naval presence and
numbers. The Red Banner Northern Fleet is a force that Scotland couldn’t fight
on the high seas.

And it is a force with nuclear attack
submarines.

The Icelandic academics said:

"Like all Nordic states, Scotland
would be at a deep strategic disadvantage vis-a-vis the main potentially
problematic actor in the region, namely Russia. It would have less than a
twelfth of the population of, and far less military strength than, its nearest
neighbour - the remaining UK (rUK). It would also be more exposed,
geopolitically, than rUK to the wider Arctic zone which is expected to witness
rapid development and turbulence - if not actual conflict - because of climate
change."

They also added that small states are
"disproportionately vulnerable" to external threats such as
"powerful crime and terrorism", making them dependent on others
"for survival in a hostile international environment".

The paper states:

"In terms both of theory and
realpolitik, Scotland as an independent small state would need external shelter
in multiple dimensions. Its solutions would incur costs different from, and not
necessarily lesser than, those carried by the Scottish people within their
present union."

The SNP defence policy is a joke, and as we
have seen SNP MP Angus Robertson has done a poor job as defence spokesman.

The nub is that Scotland's security would
depend "first and foremost" on maintaining strong ties with rUK and the
USA.

Although the US has said they are neutral
on the issue, the reality is that they don’t want an independent Scotland and has
made that clear behind the scenes.

It adds:

"Should the break-up nevertheless
happen, Washington's attitude is foreshadowed by the rumour that it pressed the
SNP leadership to switch in favour of NATO membership. Leaving a strategic
black hole north of the rUK and losing access to Scottish facilities would be a
serious setback even for US defence leaders."

The SNP is made up in part by malcontents,
in order to garner support, the SNP leadership courted CND and other groups for
votes.

Now that has backfired on them, CND members
of the SNP want a nuclear free Scotland, Salmond needs to keep them onboard to
help run the independence campaign because there are few people willing to work
for the Scottish National Party.

Scotland as an Independent Small State:
Where would it seek shelter? is written by political scientists Alyson JK
Bailes and Baldur Thorhallsson, from the University of Iceland, and Rachael
Lorna Johnstone, law lecturer at the University of Akureyri.

If you can’t get a hold of a copy then just read the George Laird view because I have been saying it first and well ahead of
everyone else.

This was in relation to when the pound was
devalued in 1967 by Harold Wilson and his Chancellor James Callaghan.

Fast forward to 2013, the SNP are saying
that they use "the wealth of Scotland" to fund its pension
commitments if it becomes independent.

So, if Finance Secretary John Swinney is
going to be trying to plug the financial black hole that is pensions, what does
that mean regards to the Oil Fund?

I would suggest it means that it would be
decades before any money would be available from that Fund to boost services.

We are now finding out the further we get
into this campaign that because nothing has been done by the SNP we are staring
a black hole in the face, the prospect of higher taxes and massive cuts to
services.

Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon haven’t
done the work; the independence bid is little more than a badly botched fraud.

Better Together, the pro UK campaign has been
quick to seize on the "pensions time-bomb", because this issue like
many connect to finance has real traction with people.

The Elderly can’t get their pensions, we
would we see Scotland descend into the position of Greece?

Greece is in terrible trouble, and the
people have seen their country asset stripped and austerity which is totally
unacceptable.

Scotland in the second term of this
parliament should have been about Government and Local Government Reform, the
opportunity was there and it was missed.

Better Together have also challenged John
Swinney to explain how he will fund pensions in a country where the number of
elderly people is rising faster than the UK, so far given the current state of
government he could provide a credible answer.

But presumably there will be rhetoric of
everything will be taken care of, just wait and see, well ordinary working
class Scots people can’t take that gamble, many of whom are living week to week
financially.

And if independence happens there will be
consequences, EU cross-border pensions regulations could also force UK pension
providers to eliminate their funding shortfalls immediately.

Chaos on both sides of the border!

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of
Scotland consultant David Davison is reported in the press as saying
"charities will potentially have to close" if they are forced to
eliminate their pension deficits immediately after independence to meet EU
rules.

As I said many, many times in the past on
this blog, there had to be a rolling blue print of how an independent Scotland
would look, the plan would have to deal with matters like these.

The Scottish National Party has done
nothing!

In a spirit of blaming England, John Swinney
said:

"The pensions issues that the country
faces today have not been created by independence, they have been created by
the Union. Most of the problems in occupational pension schemes have been
created by the £500 million per annum raid on pension funds that was put in
place by Gordon Brown, so it really is the ultimate in hypocrisy for Labour and
the No campaign to raise any issues about pensions given that the UK Government
have made an absolute mess of pensions in this country and presided over the
creation of pensions deficits. Now clearly the Scottish Government is
determined to put in place arrangements to ensure that pensions are properly
and fully funded. That is our commitment and our priority, and the approach
that we will take towards negotiations with the UK Government will be designed
to ensure that we take that forward as part of the independence
negotiations."

Blame England, where is the positive in
this?

Yes, there are problems, however leaving
everything up in the air and then concoct a ‘story’ to feed to the people is
equally dishonest politics.

Labour Sahadown Pensions Minister Gregg McClymont
said:

"In his wilful refusal to face reality
on the pensions issue, John Swinney increasingly resembles a flat-earther. The
fact is that these defined benefit pension schemes with tens of thousands of
Scots members would be thrown into turmoil overnight by separation. Charities
across the UK are facing difficult challenges and will be hugely concerned to
learn that if the SNP gets their way, the funding shortfall in their pension
schemes would, by EU law, have to be filled overnight."

Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said:

"The lack of answers from the SNP over
cross-border pension schemes in an independent Scotland could mean that
charities have to dip into their resources to close holes in funding sooner
rather than later. This highlights the real consequences the SNP's plans to
break Scotland away from the UK could have for pensions."

Like so many issues the SNP are just making
policy up as they go along, long term planning needs long term thinking, and
that isn’t a hallmark of the SNP under Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Finally, last night I was a member of the Newsnight
Scotland debate audience on independence and the Monarchy, interestingly the SNP put up MSP
Christine Grahame who is anti Monarchy. You would have thought given the SNP
position is supposed to be pro Monarchy, they would have put up a strong voice
in support of the Royal Family; they didn’t. As we have seen the Yes Scotland Campaign
is filled with many groups who wish to see a republic in Scotland, I don’t
sense the SNP is genuine about having the Queen has Head of State, although the
SNP are more devious than clever, they must have known what message having Christine
Grahame sitting there sends out.

There is an issue of trust surrounding Alex
Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, whether it is pensions or the Royal Family.

So far, the Scottish National Party can’t
be trusted with either, questions have been asked and no answers that make sense are coming back.

The issue of the Monarchy seems to be the
hot topic of today, later on this evening the matter will be debated in a
special Newsnight Scotland discussion on the issue.

The title is Independence and the Monarchy and I will be a member of the audience being one of the most prominent bloggers on the Scottish politics scene.

So, where do I stand on the issue of the Royal Family?

I support the Monarchy; the institution is
very much a part of Scotland’s history, as it is part of our present and
future.

However, there is a growing numbers of
independence supporters who wish to get rid of it, ranging from chairman of the
Yes campaign, Dennis Canavan as well as SNP MSP John Wilson, ­independent Margo
MacDonald and Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie.

In the SNP there is a strong republican
group who have an agenda, it is anti British, some of these republicans I would
dub ‘Sein Fein lite’ because their republicanism is all about the British
presence in Ireland.

The signing up of people specifically to
get a certain persons elected, as one SNP official said to me, the SNP has the
best electoral system that money can buy.

So, what happened during the episode above?

Nothing until it came into the public
domain, is this Canavan’s preferred option, no one can buy the Queen, however
it appears that in the Scottish National Party if you have enough cash you can
attempt to buy a seat at Holyrood on the list system.

As well as Canavan, leading the charge is SNP
MSP John Wilson, you may remember as the anti NATO buffoon who shouted the odds
only to get defeated by the SNP U turn.

SNP MSP John Wilson isn’t one of life’s
great thinkers; I have met him and spoken to him, dense, unsophisticated, a
little man in every sense of the word.

Then, there are ­independent Margo
MacDonald and Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie who says they want a national
referendum on who should be head of state in the event of a Yes vote.

President Salmond?

I find that notion as completely
unappealing as President Blair.

The SNP leadership’s position is keeping
the Queen as head of state in an independent Scotland, however, the issue of
trust arises; there is a strong republican element in the aprty who hate the
British!

The ‘Sein Fein
lite’ brigade.

So, yet again another
issue that shows the Yes Camp in meltdown as Senior
pro-independence campaigners insisted that First Minister Alex Salmond would
not be allowed to dictate the make-up of Scotland’s constitution.

There are many reasons to vote No, Dennis
Canavan, SNP MSP John Wilson, ­independent Margo MacDonald and Scottish Greens
co-leader Patrick Harvie want to rob Scots of their past, and Alex Salmond and
Nicola Sturgeon want to rob Scots of their future.

Also in the anti Monarchy grouping is Robin
McAlpine, director of the left-wing Jimmy Reid Foundation, and Jonathon Shafi,
co-founder of the Radical ­Independence campaign.

Dennis Canavan has said that Prince George
should never be king of an independent Scotland in the wake of the birth of the
royal baby.

SNP MSP John Wilson added:

“Clearly the issue is up for discussion. Dennis’s
line is the correct one as it’s the right of Scottish people under independence
to decide what type of Scotland they want I have a similar position to Dennis,
as in a ­democracy we should all be treated as equal citizens and there are ­issues
about having a ­hereditary head of state. Clearly the issue is up for
discussion and we could look at having an elected head of state.”

John Wilson doesn’t stand for fairness,
equality or social justice, I have experience of his warped judgment and as I
say he is an utter buffoon who I cannot take seriously.

The SNP keen to dupe Scots has issued a
statement claiming the Queen would ­remain as head of state if Scots vote for
independence in the referendum on 18 September 2014.

An SNP spokesman said:

“Dennis Canavan is perfectly entitled to
believe in an elected head of state, and will be free to argue that case in an
independent Scotland just as Labour MPs who support an elected head of state in
the UK argue for that ­position at present.”

The fly in the ointment however is that
Green MSP Mr Harvie, said the issue was not solely within the gift of the SNP,
and Harvie is right, the Constitution much like the MSP list system could end
up being rigged by some grotty back door deal.

Patrick Harvie said:

“It seems ­bizarre that we are debating ­creating
a new independent state without a discussion on how we appoint a head of state.
It should be part of the process of drawing up a constitution in an independent
Scotland not something that’s dictated by the current Scottish Government.”

Independent MSP Ms MacDonald:

“Alex Salmond is at pains to say that there
won’t be a burst of lightning after independence and that the strands of
British life that people appreciate will continue. But people should decide and
will decide on the monarchy and the head of state.”

Pro-independence campaigners Mr McAlpine
and Mr Shafi both said a referendum on the monarchy should be held soon after a
Yes vote.

McAlpine added:

“In the coverage of the monarchy in
Scotland, it’s implied that it’s a decision for Alex Salmond to make on behalf
of Scotland. But it’s for all of the people of Scotland to decide and if we
went a year past a referendum, I’m not sure that people would vote to keep the
Queen.”

Mr Shafi said:

“If we win independence a whole range of
questions have got to be addressed and the monarchy is one that would have to
be dealt with fairly quickly.”

So, the Yes Camp is in meltdown, Alex
Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon can’t be trusted as we have seen plainly, some of
the malcontents or as I call them the
‘Sein Fein lite’ brigade are on the warpath.

This is a rather
squalid nasty little episode that shows the Yes Camp up for what it is; a group
of malcontents who are divorced from reality and out of touch with ordinary
Scottish beliefs. As this independence campaign goes on, we are seeing the deep
loathing that exists against Britishness.

The British Royal
family are as a much an integrated part of Scottishness as they are other parts
of Britain.

It’s Scotland’s Royal
family and we should be proud of that heritage, they stand for so much more
than themselves.

Minimum pricing for alcohol was a SNP
Policy that was brought forward under the disastrous tenure of Scotland’s
unpopular Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon when health minister.

It is a policy that punishes the poor working
class Scots -who have done nothing wrong!

It is a Nicola Sturgeon policy.

The SNP despite opposition has decided to
press forward with this however, it emerged five European wine-producing
nations had branded minimum pricing for alcohol as illegal, unfair and
ineffective.

France, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Bulgaria
are effectively standing up for working class Scots against the Scottish
National Party, the party of Salmond, the party of Sturgeon, the party of the
rich!

Current Health Sec Alex Neil has vowed to
fight if a challenge to the SNP plans ends up in the European Court.

France, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Bulgaria
argue that minimum unit pricing breaches European free trade law by
discriminating against imported alcohol products. It is a point; my preferred
option to combat underage drinking was to raise the age limit from buying from
an off sale to 25 years of age and impose stiff penalties for people who sell
and buy for youngsters.

"There is no demonstration that this
measure will have an effect on the people it is trying to protect."

It will end up that people will pay higher
prices at the expense of items like food.

Unsurprisingly Holyrood has already passed
legislation which seeks to introduce a minimum price for alcohol of 50p per
unit; Holyrood will pass anything no matter how stupid because it is SNP
controlled.

Although the Court of Session has already dismissed
a legal challenge by the Scottish Whiskey Association to minimum pricing,
saying then that "the measures were not incompatible with EU law".

We should remember, the Court of Session
has a habit of backing SNP controlled Holyrood only to be shot down by a higher
court.

Does this measure represent a barrier to
trade?

Possibly, people will only pay so much for
a product before it isn’t seen as viable.

Also the SNP accusation "about dealing
with the very specific problem we have of alcohol abuse in Scotland" isn’t
proven; not all drunken brawls are the result of buying from off sales.

The evidence is the amount of people arrested
after brawling in the streets after binge drinking in pubs.

"Within Europe we are allowed, if the
measure is proportional, to deal with a social problem, you are allowed to
introduce measures like minimum unit pricing. Our argument is this is a very
proportional measure to deal with a very substantial problem."

That argument is certainly challengeable on
its legal basis of justification.

As to the legal challenges, Neil was quick
to say:

"We've already had round one in the
Court of Session with the Scotch Whisky Association and the Court of Session
considered the European law aspect of this, as well as Scots law. We won hands
down."

It is a different matter however when the
SNP have no control or influence such as when they took other issues to outside
bodies such as the UK Supreme Court.

So, the SNP will go the full way, their
case is that Scotland is a ‘nation of drunks’ who need to be controlled by
taking more money out of their pockets and handing it to drink makers.

Mr Barreto told BBC Radio Scotland that
"part of our objection has to do with the fact that we perceive this
measure as an ineffective measure to fight alcohol abuse or misuse".

He says there was no evidence "that
these types of measures, based on minimum pricing per unit, have any
demonstrable effectiveness."

Barreto also added:

Mr Barreto:

"We live in a free trade market area,
the measure applied in one country is bound to have an effect on all the
others. We have extreme opposition to measures we perceive to be ineffective
and there is no demonstration that this measure will have an effect on the
people it is trying to protect. Even though the products I represent are high
quality, they may have a lower price. This is one of the key points for their
competitiveness in a very regulated, highly-taxed market such as the Scottish
or the UK markets. This measure will impose a detrimental obstacle to entry of
new products of quality, but which at the same time may be a more competitive
price, to the Scottish market. The Portuguese government, along with several
other governments in the European Union, has voiced their opposition against
this measure, which could be perceived as a protectionist measure."

So, the SNP case is quite straight forward,
Scotland is a ‘nation of drunks’ who can’t handle their booze, but nothing will
be done about the real problem of binge drinking in pubs and fights in the
street.

This is all about punishing the poorest in
society who can’t afford to drink in pubs or prefer their own company.

Another pig in a poke courtesy of Scotland’s
unpopular Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon who given the collapse of
independence support appears to be losing friends and allies at a rate of knots.

Luckily her ministerial salary is so high
that she can get her booze by the crate load, she isn’t affected by her stupid ill
judged idea which just punishes the poorest in society.Nicola really 'cares'....... aye right!

When it comes to defence, the Scottish
National Party are absolutely clueless, the latest piece of grudge, grievance
and malcontent to come out of Alex Salmond is that there is no major Royal Navy
warship is based at a Scottish port.

Scotland as part of the UK is defended as
part of a UK network of bases all over the country.

Scotland has what must be the most
important naval base in the UK; Faslane, it houses the Nuclear Submarine fleet.

This fleet guarantees Scotland’s security,
previously I have blogged on the need that the SNP adopt NATO and promise that if
independent, a deal should be made to keep the nuclear fleet in Scottish water.

Sadly petty SNP politics rejected the nuclear
option, this is due to the fact that the SNP isn’t really a political party but
rather a number of grudge and grievance groups cobbled together.

Again like so much of what Alex Salmond
says he clearly has no idea, there is no plan, and some time ago, the SNP made
a ridiculous pledge that Scottish Soldiers would have a job for life!

Scottish Soldiers would have a job for life,
this is totally unworkable.

In his visit to Lerwick to try and
re-launch his failed independence campaign he said:

"Our current naval capability is based
on prestige, not performance. The navy does not have a single major surface
vessel based in Scotland. The largest protection vessels stationed in Scottish
waters are those of the fisheries protection vessels run by the Scottish
government. It is absurd for a nation with a coastline longer than India's to
have no major surface vessels. And it's obscene for a nation of five million
people to host weapons of mass destruction."

There is so much there to pick apart so let’s
get started, all naval capability is based on performance, the Royal Navy is
one of the most professional in the World. As to Salmond hinting that Scotland
is left to be protected by fisheries protection vessels run by the Scottish
government, that is just a joke, and presumably for the gullible.

Modern naval warfare as far back as I can
remember is a matter of both naval and air power, you can research this by
going as far back to WW2 and the events like the Battle of Midway.

Available on DVD if Alex Salmond wishes to
become a naval tactician and ‘First Lord of the Scottish Admiralty’!

Maybe my American friend Dr. Phillips O’Brien,
Director of the Scottish Centre for War Studies at the University of Glasgow
could educate the deeply ignorant SNP; however, he made find their company
unacceptable as I do.

And to hark back to the 1970’s, Salmond
repeated the SNP's proposal for an independent Scotland to become a
nuclear-free member of NATO.

Loser!!!!!!!!!

Scotland is in a key strategic position
because of its location, nuclear free isn’t an option, some people in the SNP
joined the party because the CND supporters, they aren’t Nationalists and never
where. Another bunch of malcontents in the SNP are the Sein Fein lite who have
a hatred of the British because of its history with Ireland; they aren’t
Nationalists either in my opinion. The SNP is made up of little groups who have
as their main focus and anti British agenda, all held together with promises to
keep them working for the leadership clique.

In a proposed Scottish Defence Force, it
would primarily be tasked with guarding Scotland and its closest neighbours,
this means it would be about a decade before they got any operational
experience. During that time Scotland wouldn’t be properly defended, we would
still have to rely on the Royal Navy. Previously Salmond said that any Scottish
Army could contribute to international peacekeeping and humanitarian missions
"over time".

So, on land we would have Dad’s Army, on
the water, we would have Captain Pugwash and associates sailing round Oil
rigs!!!!!!

And to show his barmy credentials, Salmond restated
his plan for the constitution of an independent Scotland to rule out military
action not sanctioned by the UN.

Given Russia and China have a veto; it
would mean Scotland would standby when innocents are being slaughter such as in
Kosovo.

And Salmond got that episode wrong.

A Scotland Office spokesman said:

"Yet again the Scottish Government
have passed up an opportunity to share a coherent, positive and substantive
plan with the people of Scotland on how they propose to maintain Scotland's
defence and security, and sustain thousands of jobs in Scotland's defence
industry."

In an independent Scotland, Alex Salmond
couldn’t defend a hut in a paintball game; the only plan that would probably
exist would be the plan to fly him and his cronies to London to set up a ‘government
in exile’ in the event of invasion.

As to wanting a major Royal Navy warship,
he isn’t getting one, he will just have to use a fisheries protection vessel if
he wants his clique to have ‘boat drinks’ and a party!

Salmond is right on one thing, someone is 'absurd',
he sees him every morning when he looks in the mirror to brush his hair forward.

Grudge, grievance and malcontent yet again,
the broken record is becoming very wearing on the ear!

It seems that every day something else
surfaces why the people of Scotland shouldn’t vote Yes to independence.

In public Alex Salmond has been screaming
about the riches of Oil, billions and billions of pounds just sloshing about the
place.

The ‘lake’ however isn’t stable because
although there is Oil, the SNP can’t control of the price on the world market.

Now, we have a leaked SNP document which
contents are explosive, the document tells of the need to move away from
"damaging, price-volatile fossil fuels".

For some time, I have been saying the independence
bid is all wrong, there is no detail and there is no plan or vision.

Government and local government reform was
the task of the second term of the Scottish Government, however, given reports,
the first term although spun by the SNP as a success patently wasn’t.

I wrote previously that two successful
terms of public office where needed as a minimum before a bid could be
considered.

The SNP Document, titled Scotland's Energy
Future, emerged only a day after Alex Salmond unveiled a major piece of spin stressing
the value of North Sea oil to the economy.

Roll up roll up and get your £300,000 for
every man and women in Scotland.

Except you can’t get the money!

The pro-UK Better Together campaign, which
obtained the document, said it revealed SNP Ministers' private fears about
relying too heavily on oil.

Recently Alex Salmond was shouting about
and making claims of a second North Sea boom.

The only boom is the rather large sound of
his independence dream exploding in his face, because the Nationalists have been
using assumptions and trying to pass them off as facts, which is so shoddy that
most would call it ‘dishonest politics’.

The renewable industry works, but it works
because of heavy subsidy from Westminster, the technology isn’t developed
enough, yes, it works, but it needs to work better to drive down costs to the
consumers.

Research in this area is still ongoing, but
for the SNP to be want to Promise more wind and wave power in an independent
Scotland would probably mean higher energy bills.

The idea also claims public support for
windfarms in Scotland which would allow them to expand while continuing to be
subsidised by taxpayers in England.

In an independent Scotland, who can
seriously believe that taxpayers in England will fork out their cash to heat
the resident of another country!

Does that stack up with you?

I personally doubt it.

The report also confirms SNP plans to
remain in a single energy market, the assumption is that the rest of the UK will
agree to this, where is the evidence?

However, just like the pie in the sky, the
SNP want to create a separate regulator which would be able to tackle fuel
poverty.

The business of business is business, not
charity.

So, yet again, we seem to be getting the
cold hard facts from John Swinney's department, down the road or across the
street, we have Alex Salmond and his merry men telling a different story.

And this isn’t the first time that the
Finance Secretary has raised similar concerns about fluctuating oil revenues or
indeed Scotland’s ability to pay its way.

Labour's shadow energy minister Tom
Greatrex said:

"This leaked paper yet again makes
public the private concern of SNP ministers about the volatility and
instability of oil prices. The tax we get from the North Sea is so volatile
that the difference between the highest and lowest years is the equivalent of
Scotland's NHS budget. By pooling our resources across the
whole of the UK we can better manage the peaks and troughs of oil
revenue."

The Conservatives' Scotland Office minister
David Mundell said:

"I welcome the latest recognition from
the Scottish Government remaining in the UK is the best way to secure our
future. Their paper argues for the regulation of a single UK-wide market, as we
have. It also argues for the continued subsidy of renewables by consumers
across the UK, which already happens and gives Scotland a share of funding
which is higher than its population share. The fact is Scotland needs the wide
consumer base of the UK to underpin its renewables ambitions."

So, there are two versions running in the
SNP, the spin from Alex Salmond and the real fears coming from John Swinney's
department about how to balance the books.

When evidence like this is brought into the
public domain, one can wonder how many people who have voted SNP in the past
will still do so, clearly Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon don’t understand the
big picture, and the small one is also a bit too much for them to grasp.

I sense what they don’t want to say
publicly is that in an independent Scotland it won’t just be higher taxes that
will be needed but big business will also experience the windfall of higher
energy bills paid for the ordinary working class people of Scotland.

I am voting No to independence, because I
don’t trust Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Ewing kept saying the word “appropriate”,
so no plan, and no details of what the criteria would be, is there anyone so
stupid as to buy into this left in Scotland?

The answer is yes, the sycophants who think
they will benefit from the SNP via taxpayer funds.

As part of the strategy to be seen as
competent, Salmond is now saying an independent Scotland would take on the UK's
£20 billion pledge to help with the cost of decommissioning North Sea oil rigs.

Is that factored in anywhere?

And if it is; when is the date that the Oil
Fund would be created, when would it generate revenue?

These are all serious questions, because in
the meantime, the financial black hole would have to be filled by the SNP by
either higher taxes or cuts to services, or both!

Alex Salmond isn’t even pledging to raise
the tax for big Oil companies, which means shortfalls would have to be picked
up by the Scottish taxpayers.

Announcing the new report, Salmond said:

"Scotland has been blessed with
unrivalled natural resources and communities around the country should benefit
from them. Oil and gas revenues would offer a premium advantage for an
independent Scotland – a tremendous bonus to boost any diverse modern
economy."

The head of the pro-UK Better Together
campaign has responded by calling on Alex Salmond to withdraw claims made in a
BBC interview that the £1.5trillion of untapped North Sea oil was ­equivalent
to "£300,000 for every man, woman and child in Scotland".

Alistair Darling said:

"For Alex Salmond to treat us like
fools by deliberately confusing the wholesale value of oil with the amount we
would actually raise through tax is fundamentally dishonest."

Scottish Labour's Iain Gray said the report
was an attempt to "de-risk the referendum" while

In trying to raise themselves their sinking
independence ship, no real attempt has been made to even patch up the keel. It
is another disastrous piece of spin which is based on a promise that might
happen at sometime in the future but no one knows.

Last night the Scottish National Party
found out yet again that there isn’t any real talent in Alex Salmond’s Cabinet.

Gordon Brewer easily picked apart Fergus Ewing,
and he is the Energy Minister, he should have had all the answers, he had
nothing but bluster and spin.

The No vote in my opinion has received another
boost, if you can’t even get the criteria out of the SNP, then you know that
there is no plan, just like there is no plan for anything.

The reason is in my opinion why they have
taken this route is that they haven’t done any of the work previously.

And if they keep saying expert all the
time, it might somehow convince some people that they have got their act together.

Awhile ago the SNP formed an “expert” group
on welfare, and the report was less than impressive, and we were all treated by
the group going into hiding and cancelling a meeting MSPs at Holyrood.

Experts indeed, perhaps in hide and seek.

The latest group of “experts” is to be
found in the expert commission to be established to examine how an independent
Scotland can maximise the returns from North Sea oil and gas.

As a starter, there is a new paper on oil and
gas which gives the broad strokes that the SNP administration will enact with
plans for the industry if it secures independence.

So, we are back to the already tried and
failed strategy of ‘its Scotland’s Oil’.

That strategy never worked before and it
won’t work now!

Expect numbers like Billions of pounds to
be floating about on a lake of spin as part of the nirvana effect which Alex
Salmond is trying desperately to sell.

But give yourself a hard slap in the face,
possibly several times, because you wouldn’t be getting any of the wealth
directly in your pocket.

What!!!!!!

And don’t expect the price of petrol at the
pump to drop either.

What!!!!

Nirvana, SNP nirvana is a pipe dream, it
doesn’t exist.

So what are the facts?

The facts are, the SNP are making claims
based on no details, Salmond is saying one thing in public and people like John
Swinney are saying another in confidential papers.

The paper states:

"Given the industry's importance to
Scotland's economy, Scottish ministers will shortly be announcing the creation
of an expert commission to develop the proposals outlined in this paper. The
Oil and Gas Expert Commission will build upon the approach and overarching
principles set out in this paper, and provide advice on the technical
application of the policy framework, which would underpin Scottish Government
policy in an independent Scotland."

What does that mean?

Nothing!

Then there is said to be the creation of an
Oil Fund like Norway, they started its oil fund in 1990 but it wasn’t till 1996
until they started transferring money.

Norway isn’t Scotland, and the reason the
Norwegians can have such a fund is that they are high taxpayers.

Since the SNP are aware of that
electorally, they would probably end up cutting services instead.

Even if there is an Oil Fund: it would
be decades before the money (interest) could be siphoned off to make a real
difference.

How long post set up could money be made
available and for whom?

These questions and many others that show the
lack of detail in the plans of Alex Salmond.

Salmond said:

"Almost all oil production and more
than half of total gas production over the next three decades will take place
in Scottish waters. And of course, only through independence would Scotland
receive the tax revenues from this production. This paper restates the Scottish
Government commitment to establish an oil fund when the fiscal conditions allow”.

“When the fiscal conditions allow”, that is
so open ended, we all could be dead and buried before that is brought into
force, so is this a commitment to a promise or a promise to a commitment?
Either way, it looks remarkable like assumptions presented as fact, and we have
clearly had enough of that from Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Then comes the standard grudge, grievance
and malcontent from Salmond, its Westminster’s fault, he added:

"With Westminster having squandered
the opportunities of the first half, it's up to us to make a better job of the
second half. We will provide optimum conditions for the oil and gas industry to
innovate and thrive in a globally competitive environment."

Does that mean the oil and gas industry
paying less tax?

Or does it mean Salmond will invite people
round for tea?

Although Scotland has oil, it isn’t the
Saudi Arabia of the North, it is helpful, but given other real problems, the
need for a balanced economy is just as important, Scotland doesn’t have an
effective manufacturing base like Germany for example.

And then there is Scotland’s debt, in an
independent Scotland that would have to be a priority before any talk of an Oil
Fund could even be discussed.

Matters aren’t helped by the abject failure
of Scottish Government, local Government and NGO reforms plus associated
organisations in receipt of taxpayer funded income, that all needed to be dealt
with.

Plans for that?

Please!!!!!

Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said:

“Salmond is "conveniently ignoring the
most basic economic truths that corporate profits and government tax revenue
are two very different things. Alex Salmond should withdraw this disingenuous
claim and explain the facts of why he believes Scotland would be better
managing a volatile, declining and finite resource without the strength of the
broad UK tax base behind it. When predicting oil revenues it's sensible to be
cautious because it is such an unpredictable resource. But the Nationalists
need to be reckless to make their sums add up. There is already a £23.9 billion
black hole between the Nationalists' most optimistic figures and the Office for
Budget Responsibility's more cautious estimate. That represents over two-thirds
of the current Scottish Government budget. If the Nationalists don't want to
use oil tax, which would represent a sixth of Scotland's tax take, to pay for
public services they'd either have to cut services or increase taxes. That is
the basic reality of their claims”.

So, do you want higher taxes or cuts to
public services?

The reality is in my opinion that the SNP
would bring in higher taxes and oversee sweeping cuts to public services.

Glasgow University-based Centre for Public
Policy for the Regions (CPPR) doesn’t seem to be a believer in the Alex Salmond
and Nicola Sturgeon nirvana dream; they have challenged the suggestion that oil
would be a "bonus" for Scotland.

Alex Salmond is all about sucking up to the
rich, and as much of North Sea activity is owned by international companies,
the ordinary Scot won’t get a look in. The bottom line is that onshore
tax-revenues "would not be sufficient to match the current Scottish
government spending" which is "well above the UK average".

This is because, everything connected for a
successful independence bid hasn’t been done, and continually refined over
years.

The SNP has been in business for circa 80
years and during that time, it festered in grudge, grievance and malcontent,
lately the leadership have benefited from the Scottish Parliament and done well
at the trough.

If they were competent they would have done
the work!

The kicker of this story is this would mean
that no such revenues would be available to build up a Sovereign (Oil) Fund for
some considerable time if at all.

"It's taken its toll on the whole
family, particularly on Joseph's mother. We've been up and back to ­Dingwall
five times. If Joseph had been done for assault I'd hold my hands up. They'd be
entitled to drag him through the courts. But we've been through the mill and
back over allegations he sang two songs. Alex Salmond has a lot to answer to on
these laws. He should go to some football games in Europe and witness some real
offensive behaviour."

Alex Salmond because of an incident at a
Rangers & Celtic game between Ally McCoist and Neil Lennon acted in his
usual knee jerk fashion. A law was then drafted to meet a football season timetable;
hence we have a load of crap which the SNP MSP like the unthinking drones that
they are just rubber stamped.

Labour's justice spokesman, Graeme Pearson,
said:

"Our police officers are being put in
an unenviable position of making a judgment about what falls within the
freedoms of expression which individuals enjoy and behaviour which falls foul
of the law. This case is evidence that the position our police officers are
being put in is simply unacceptable. The legislation needs review."

If ever there was a need for a Bill to be
removed from the Statute Books then the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act
fits that bill to a T, should football games be banned, because such large
numbers historically act as a catalyst for public disorder?

What then about other large gatherings, pop
concerts, anti war demos, trade unions meetings and fair grounds?

We need law to be clear, to be understandable
to the ordinary person and this Bill fails that test spectacularly.

It seems that Elish Angiolini has become
all warm and fuzzy since leaving the Procurator Fiscal Service.

Her latest piece of warmness is to say Scotland’s
centuries-old law of corroboration could be subject to a challenge at the
European Court of Human Rights.

Should corroboration be kept?

I believe that it should, two sources of
evidence, in my opinion are a vital safeguard in the Court system.

The SNP have picked the emotional subject
of rape as a basis of why change is important, it isn’t about finding justice;
it is all about improving conviction rates.

I would have thought that the numbers game
should play no part in justice; does having effectively having a quota mean
more justice?

To be blunt a conviction can simply hang on
who is the better story teller in a Court.

Elish Angiolini says in the future a victim
whose case has failed to get to court could mount a legal challenge at Strasbourg
against the Scottish system.

I have previously blogged that Holyrood
needs two Deputy Justice Ministers, one tasked with general law review and the
other on special projects to tighten up the law.

Proper government requires proper structures
to make the best possible outcomes, sadly the current system is broken, and the
‘fix’ by Scotland’s Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill is a botched job.

Piecemeal doesn’t work.

Last month saw the SNP Government
introduced their disastrous Criminal Justice Bill, when it comes to law the SNP
don’t do well, Chewing gum, parking, and the awful Fitba Bill are plainly
evidence on the lack of vision.

Many Lawyers quite rightly are opposed to
this change, with the Law Society of Scotland leading the way; they have described
corroboration as a “fundamental principle” of the justice system.

I don’t favour change for change sake, this
Criminal Justice Bill is another badly thought-out piece of junk.

Raymond McMenamin of the Law Society said
removing corroboration agrees with me and many others that this Bill would
result in a “contest between two competing statements on oath” and an increased
risk of miscarriages of justice which would follow suit.

He said:

“The requirement for corroborated evidence
is not an antiquated, outmoded legal notion, but is a fundamental principle of
our justice system.”

Understandably, this Bill has backers, such
as Police Scotland Chief Constable Stephen House and groups including Scottish
Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis Scotland.

How do they feel about miscarriages of
justice?

You see everyone likes to climb on the bandwagon
of populism, but when presented with a miscarriage, these people don’t want to
be the same room as the people who suffer, apparently too busy, but sorry…
obviously, but quickly followed the old standby ‘we thought we were doing the
right thing’.

This might be a Bill that creates more
problems than it actually solves, so far this term of the SNP has been a
complete shambles.

And we are seen the results of the last
term weren’t so spectacular as previously promoted, particularly the health portfolio
which was managed by Scotland’s unpopular Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

The big three areas, Law, Health and Education
all have major problems, but the SNP Government is all out chasing the independence
dream rather than doing their jobs.

Kenny MacAskill should have been sacked
years ago, this is just another awful piece of work to try and remove the
stigma of Al Megrahi from his record; the shambles he creates in Justice
however can never remove this stain.

It goes too deep.

If I am sitting on a jury, I want to see
facts, I want hard evidence, a story really doesn’t do it for me at all.

“I dreamed a dream in time gone by
When hope was high
And life worth living
I dreamed that love would never die
I dreamed that God would be forgiving
Then I was young and unafraid
And dreams were made and used and wasted
There was no ransom to be paid
No song unsung, no wine untasted”

From the song I dreamed a dream in the hit
musical Les Miserables.

Well two Miserables, Scotland’s ‘jolly fat
man’ Alex Salmond and Scotland’s unpopular Deputy First Minister Nicola
Sturgeon won’t be happy that Scottish singer Susan Boyle has voiced her support
for the pro-Union Better Together campaign.

For some time Alex Salmond has been writing
to celebrities outside his clique and hangers on to seek support.

People aren’t even writing back.

Andy Murray was sent 8 letters, not a
single reply from him to Alex Salmond.

Yes, no public sector reform, no economic plans,
the scribbling on the back of a fag packet still isn’t finished yet, it’s
called the White Paper.

In an interview with the The Sun, Boyle said:

“I strongly believe Scotland should remain
part of Britain. I am a proud, patriotic Scot, passionate about my heritage and
my country. But I am not a nationalist.”

Funnily enough that puts her in the same
boat as Nicola Sturgeon, her “nationalism” isn’t based on “nationalism” but
what she says is social justice and fairness.

Try telling that to the countless patients
who have suffered in the Scottish NHS under her leadership; who couldn’t get the
right drugs to treat their cancer, those left on trolleys, babies wrapped in towels
and on and on and on!

Nicola Sturgeon is a true heroine to her squalid nasty little clique.

Anyway, it seems that Alex Salmond won’t be living
in the dream in 2014!

425 days to the political death of Alex
Salmond at the indy ballot box, maybe Ms. Boyle can come and sing at the
Funeral.